Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old December 16th, 2020 #1
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default Midway

I missed this one when it was released a couple of years ago, and was hated. Really got terrible reviews, and it sank fast.

I brought the DVD. It's by Roland Emmerich, who did Pearl Harbor (which I wasn't too crazy about), and I was really impressed with this film. It captures events just before Pearl Harbor to Midway, centering on Best, a dive bombing aviator who saved the day and was crippled during the battle. His story was well told.

I thought it was a good story, featuring two big (if fading) stars; Dennis Quaid as Admiral Halsey, and Woody Harrelson as Nimitz. I enjoyed the scope of action, and the CGI, which so many hated, I found good in recreating the battle. Some critics said it was like a video game; to me, it showed what skill you need to fly on a carrier, and especially in dive bombing.

It was the new naval warfare, using aircraft. During the war, the line admirals on both sides yearned and planned for a big set piece battle of battleships squaring off against each other, but that kind of war was obsolete. Airplanes determined the action.

It's been compared to the earlier Midway with Henry Fonda and Charlton Heston. I liked this better. The actors here are younger, which was what the pilots would have been then, and in the original Midway there was an obnoxious subplot of a naval officer having an affair Wirth a Japanese-American girl who gets shipped off to an internment camp...boo-hoo. Here, the only women are navy wives. Much better.

Also, I kind of liked that the uniforms looked wrinkled, which khaki does unless you starch it...my old army days...making it look like they actually worked in them and were in a tropical climate.

The scale of the battle is naturally trimmed to two hours time, but depicts how important Midway was. It is interesting how by March of 1942, Japan had accomplished all their goals. They did win their war, but wanted Midway and New Guinea as centers for bombers, so they could keep Hawaii and Australia at bay, and so went for those places, and lost.

It was really a battle the peacetime navy fought, and it was hit and miss, but in the end, we sank much of the Japanese carrier fleet, turning the tide in the pacific.

The Japanese side was presented, and it's interesting the film was dedicated to both the American and Japanese men who fought. After seventy years, I guess we can do that, although one scene where captured naval airmen are thrown off a Jap ship, anchors tied to them, for refusing to give information, really happened, and it doesn't make me like them.

I noted critics are two kinds: the movie critics, who complained of outdated American values and corny dialogue, stagey scenes and flag-waving sentiments...well, fuck 'em. We know what these assholes are like. I think one scene where Best lands a bomb on top of a carrier and says 'This is for Pearl Harbor' is probably what he said, or certainly thought.

I also like that they got the hairstyles and fashions right. The women look like 1940's women. In the original Midway, everyone looked early seventies, which was when the film was made.

The second set of critics complained about the inaccurate airplanes, chronology of events, unrealistic special effects and naval procedure. Didn't bother me.
Some of these 'vet' critics, remind me of the crowd I saw at a John McCain rally in Boston...older guys, most wearing naval baseball caps and leather flying jackets...the real hero worshiping, cuckservatives crowding around the bus painted 'Straight Talk Express.' Ugh.

So, I liked Midway, and it's a good Saturday night movie I found well written and well-paced. And, yes, nigger free, although it's got plenty of Japs.
 
Old December 16th, 2020 #2
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

I'll take the 1976 Midway with all its faults over the 2019 crapfest. I'm sick of World War Jew movies anyway, Hymiewood will never make a decent and truthful one. You have to look at foreign films like Das Boot and Stalingrad for that. The last WWjew flick I thought was halfway good was Unbroken. And it's hard to believe Angelina Jolie was the producer of that.
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old December 17th, 2020 #3
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default Midway

So, do you not like the movie, or simply because jews made it? I've told you why I like the movie. Do you have specific criticisms?

Is it a car-fest because of certain parts of the story, or is this an ideological thing?
 
Old December 18th, 2020 #4
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven clark View Post
So, do you not like the movie, or simply because jews made it? I've told you why I like the movie. Do you have specific criticisms?

Is it a car-fest because of certain parts of the story, or is this an ideological thing?
Everyone knows Charlton Heston won the Battle of Midway when he planted that bomb right on the Hiryu's deck at the end of the movie.

Well, Roland Emmerich being the producer of the 2001 Pearl Harbor load of shit didn't help with this movie. It pretty much looked the same to me. The battle sequences did look like a video game or something from Star Wars, especially Dick Best taking out the Akagi. There was way too much anti-aircraft fire, the Japanese weren't able to throw that much flak as shown in the movie at attacking planes at that stage of the war.

There are 4 Yamato-class battleships shown in the CGI of the Japanese fleet. Japan only built 2 of them, and the Yamato herself was Admiral Yamamoto's flagship, several hundred miles behind the Midway attacking force.

Only 4 USAAF B-26s, flying from Midway and armed with torpedoes took part in attacking the Jap fleet. At least a dozen are shown. A few B-17s also tried bombing the fleet from high altitude, but I can't remember if that was shown.

Where were the American fighter planes, such as the F4F Wildcat? I didn't see any in the movie. We only saw SBD Dauntless dive bombers and TBD Devastator torpedo planes. Quite a lot of Jap Zeros were seen, however.

The scene of the USS Nautilus is wrong. The Nautilus attacked the battleship Kirishima, not a carrier. And early-war American torpedoes like the Mark 14 were garbage, many of which failed to detonate, including ones fired by the Nautilus. And those guys, including the captain, would not be smoking cigarettes at battle stations in the middle of a battle.

I just can't take seriously that doofus Woody Harrelson as Nimitz. I thought Henry Fonda's performance in the '76 Midway was better.

Sure, the dialog and acting in both movies was cringe-worthy, but I just plain didn't like the 2019 version. Just my personal opinion/preference.

There is a Japanese movie, Yamamoto Isoroku, made in 2011, which I believe shows a more realistic portrayal of the Midway battle (with less AA fire, too), albeit from the Japanese perspective. I think it's worth a view.

Like I said, Hymiewood will never make a good, accurate WW2 movie, and the foreign films are superior.
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old December 18th, 2020 #5
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default midway

Your objections are what I've read in other accounts, and I can agree the recent movie will have inaccuracies, but the original Midway did as well. Both are good movies, but I've stated my preferences.

I just felt the actors in the remake looked more like men from back in the forties, and I was glad there weren't big name stars. A lot of times that gets in the way of the story. I was reminded of the film The Spirit of St. Louis, where Jimmy Stewart played Charles Lindbergh. He was just too old for the part, and I thought Lindbergh was an exceptional, brilliant man. Stewart kind of played that down.

But again, I prefer the new Midway, and both films have their good points and admirers.

I agree the best historical films are done outside of Hollywood. I think of Ride with the Devil, a Civil War movie (Alex wrote an exceptional review. Look it up), and it was directed by Ang Lee, a Chinese man.

Then again, there was a TV movie of The Rough Riders that had some good points, but was kind of long and very PC, and had some glaring historical inaccuracies (German advisors with the Spanish at San Juan Hill? The Spanish using machine guns? Roosevelt getting a captured German to show how to operate the machine guns, then shooting him in the head? Bullshit).

There was also Hitler: The Triumph of Evil which purported to be a bio of Hiutler, and had some bits here and there, but was censored by the Jews and forced to become the usual Hitler-is-the-devil. Crap.

So I'll agree with you there.
 
Old December 19th, 2020 #6
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

The worst examples of actors in WW2 movies/TV shows not looking like they are from the 1940s is Hogan's Heroes, especially female characters in regard to costumes, hairstyles, and such. They're straight out of the 1960s. Hogan's Heroes has a list of inaccuracies a mile long, but it's still one of my favorite old TV shows.

Another thing the 2019 Midway did get right were the aircraft, even if most of them were CGI. In the 1976 version, it always drives me nuts to see wartime footage of planes that were not in service in June 1942, like F6F Hellcats, F4U Corsairs, SB2C Helldivers and others with insignia and paint schemes that didn't exist during the Battle of Midway. Hell, if you look real close, the scene at the end where Heston, piloting a propeller-driven Dauntless, crashes and burns on the carrier deck and it becomes an F9F Panther, a jet-powered fighter from the Korean War! Also later Essex-class carriers that were clearly (to me, at least) not the Enterprise, Yorktown and Hornet. And worst of all, having them standing in for the IJN carriers, which were quite different in appearance from the u.s. carriers. Not counting some reused footage from Tora, Tora, Tora, which were accurate miniatures.

One movie I would really like to see is a new version of the hunt for the Bismarck. The low-quality 1960 movie Sink The Bismarck! is absolutely awful in terms of historical accuracy, story and characterization. Again, it will have to be made outside the u.s. or else it will be an unwatchable piece of garbage loaded with political correctness and anti-German and anti-Hitler propaganda. The Hymiewood jews would even manage to shoehorn the Holohoax into it somehow, and also include nigger and jew characters in the story. The recent (2020) Tom Hanks movie Greyhound may be like that, but I don't plan on watching it, anyway.
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old December 19th, 2020 #7
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default midway

The Bismarck could be a very good movie if BOTH sides could be told. I vaguely remember the 1960 movie, but I've read of this chapter in the war, very well described by David Irving in Churchill's War. Churchill was scared of the Bismarck,
and Britain really was worried, especially after it sunk the 'unsinkable' Hood.

Same thing happened with the Repulse and Prince of Wales, 'unsinkable' ships wiped out by the Japs. It was no wonder Japan went into Midway ready to wipe out our fleet.

I'd be interested in what the film would say about Luetjens, the Bismarck's captain. He came across as indecisive and probably lacked a killer instinct. After the Hood was sunk, Hitler said Luetjens should have gone after the Prince of Wales and sunk it as well. That might have sunk Churchill as well.

But the German navy seemed to lack an aggressive spirit except for Doenitz. The U-Boats really almost won the war.

It is a tribute to both nation's fighting men that each offered tributes to the other when the ships were sunk. Nowadays, it's all what the jews want us to like.
Recall Bitburg, when Reagan laid a wreath, ignoring protests there were SS men buried there. No president would ever buck that now, probably including Trump.

Another movie was Dunkirk. I preferred the older one. The recent one, which I reviewed, was okay but terribly inaccurate, and I disliked how it showed the British as cowards and defeatists. There were many good men there. Also, didn't say shit about how the retreat was possible because the French kept the lines intact, but never got shit from the British. It's always about Britain, Britain, Britain. Sort of like a certain tribe, isn't it?

Also, in the older Dunkirk, we saw scenes of Goering and the German forces. The recent one only showed the Germans as an unknown, almost invisible foe. This is the characteristic of contemporary, Jew-inspired movies where Germans have no personality at all. In the 60's and 70's, movies were showing both sides, but after Holocaust came out, this was over.

Hogan's Heroes was always b.s. The two main Germans were Jews, and Werner Klemperer (Klink), refused to play the part unless the Germans were ALWAYS shown as stupid and incompetent. And it followed the American line that WE won the war, WE were always the smart guys, WE could outsmart anyone.
But it was typical of 60's fantasy TV. I'm depressed it's on TV and goes on and on, especially when it's said most Americans get their idea of Germany watching Hogan's Heroes.
Interesting, Robert Clary, who played Lebelle, was a jew who actually was in a concentration camp, but seemed none the worse for it.

It was also odd how Hogan could just break out and fly to London for consultations anytime he wanted, but this was fantasy, like Bewitched, Gilligan's Island, etc. it was the mode.

Most TV series never have accurate hairstyles and fashions. It kind of got better in the 80's, but not much. I remember WWII episodes where all the actors had blow-dried hair, or those Conan-like films where the actresses have Farah-Fawcett curls. But that's the way it is.
When I was in Germany, a lot of GIs were used as extras for WWII movies because German actors refused to get haircuts, claiming it would keep them from getting other parts.
 
Old December 19th, 2020 #8
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

Admiral Gunther Luetjens was the fleet commander during the Bismarck sortie in May 1941, consisting of the battleship and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen. Captain Ernst Lindemann was the actual commanding officer of the Bismarck itself. They certainly did make a number of mistakes leading to the Bismarck's loss, but I won't play armchair strategist here nearly 80 years later. The 1960 movie portrayed both men terribly, especially Leutjens being shown as a fanatical Nazi, when in fact he was not. Yes, it would be good to show both the German and British sides in a fair way. I would like to see Ted Briggs, one of the three survivors from the Hood and Mullenheim-Rechburg, the Bismarck's third gunnery officer, who later wrote a book about the battle, as developed characters. But I've heard nothing about any movie studio interested in doing a project like this.

I have not seen the Dunkirk movie, but it doesn't sound very good. There are still many stories from WW2 that can be told, but many of the cinematic portrayals of them have always fallen short in one way or another, unfortunately. Guess we'll have to stick with books about it by good historians such as David Irving.
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old December 19th, 2020 #9
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default midway

Cornelius Ryan wrote The Longest Day, and you know about the movie made of that. He also wrote The Last Battle, about the fall of Berlin. I read it when a teenager, and liked it. it was very open showing all sides, especially the rape and plunder the Russians committed, but that will never be a movie. Nor would the actions of Eisenhower in not going on to Berlin. We probably could have done it, and this is always a big contention between the pro-Ike and anti-Ike factions.

Anyway, the Hitler movie about the last days was very good, although the jews naturally howled when Hitler wasn't portrayed as a raving lunatic. I'm talking about the German film made based on Hitler's secretary's memoirs.
Hitler: The Last ten Days was based on the book by Trevor-Roper, I believe, but wasn't taken from first-hand sources.

A book I liked as a kid was Commando Extraordinary, bout Otto Skorzeny. What I was impressed the most was how after the war, when he was up for war crimes, several British commando officers insisted they turn themselves in for similar 'war crimes', saying Skorzeny did nothing that they wouldn't have done and did.

In West Germany in the 60's, the German navy named a destroyer after Luetjens, and that led to a lot of protests, since Luetjens was a 'die-hard Nazi, writing a letter of praise to Hitler', but the letter was what any commander would have said to his commander-in-chief.

Pity Hitler never developed an aircraft carrier. if it had been teamed up with the Bismarck, it would have been a real knife at Britain, but Hitler wasn't that interested, and anyway, the army ate up most of the budget. As it was, Hitler wasn't that enthusiastic of the Bismarck's mission, and he was proven right.
 
Old December 26th, 2020 #10
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

Nothing beats real airplanes as opposed to CGI, as seen in Tora! Tora! Tora!.

The Zeros, Kates and Vals were actually American aircraft modified to look like the actual Japanese ones. The P-40s getting strafed and blown up are mockups, however.

__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old December 27th, 2020 #11
Stewart Meadows
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 37,509
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven clark View Post
The Japanese side was presented, and it's interesting the film was dedicated to both the American and Japanese men who fought. After seventy years, I guess we can do that, although one scene where captured naval airmen are thrown off a Jap ship, anchors tied to them, for refusing to give information, really happened, and it doesn't make me like them.
I've noticed that some American White Nationalists from your generation dislike the Japanese because of WWII, but let's be honest here; the Japanese fought on the right side, i.e. alongside the Germans.

The Brits and Americans, on the other hand, fought for the jews, and after the war was over they helped the jews torture and murder German prisoners in the most evil and sadistic ways you can imagine, like crushing their testicles (which I've written about here on VNN).

So no, I don't have much sympathy for "the greatest generation", as these jewed fucks are called. It's thanks to them that your country - and most of the West - is now controlled by jews who push third-world immigration, feminism, faggotry and sex-change operations for kids.

And if anybody cares, I'm not the one who gave you thumbs down, Steven. I generally like your interesting movie threads, you're a good writer.
 
Old December 27th, 2020 #12
Stewart Meadows
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 37,509
Default


Quote:
I'm not Japanese but the speech at the begining is amazing and give goosebumps! Love and respect to Japan from France
Quote:
Extremely brave young Men that gave their lives for their Country, they deserve the respect from Mankind.
Quote:
I cried a lot for this video and song....hope they become Shinto gods in Heaven.....Rest In Peace my friends!
Quote:
Respect from Germany. Respect for Japan.... BANZAI NIPPON
Quote:
Respect for those heroes.
Quote:
So sad to see how young they were!
Quote:
THE GREATEST WARRIORS IN THE HISTORY OF MEN.BANZAI NIPPON!!!
Quote:
Respect from Poland.
Quote:
Salute to those who sacrifised for Japan

Last edited by Stewart Meadows; December 27th, 2020 at 04:54 PM.
 
Old December 27th, 2020 #13
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default Midway

Thank you for the comment, Stewart, and I too, admire the Japanese. They were hard, tough, innovative fighters and honorable, but they did some terrible atrocities that no one can wash away. Nanking, the Bataan death march, British POW labor on the Burma railroad,etc. The incident on Midway happened, and when we liberated the Philippines, Japs murdered American POWs by burning them alive. Also, they used pows and Korean prisoners for biological war experiments...the Germans are forever denounced for this, the Japanese...hardly hear about it.

So maybe they were on the right side, but remember, they were on Japan's side before anything else. They weren't trying to help Hitler, they were wanting to drive out the whites to set up the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity sphere...where they would 'liberate' asians, although it generally meant Japs taking over as boss.

But that's war, imperialism, and king of the hill. We and Japan were in a war to control the pacific. When, in Midway, Yamamoto warns the American that if Japan doesn't get the oil the US is denying them, they won't stand for it. It's a relief that as I grew up, Japan's view was at least presented, where in my youth, Japan was seen as a land of crazy fanatics who attacked us FOR NO REASON AT ALL.
Japan had no real interests in helping Hitler. They could have attacked the USSR and really caught Stalin in a vise, but no, they wanted the Dutch oil, and there it went. They had it all...until our subs sunk all their tankers.
A book everyone might like is Len Deighton's Blood, Tears, and Folly, 'an objective look at WWII.' He's no friend of Hitler, but offers some very thoughtful views of both sides, and their motivations, as well as their weaponry. Oil really determined who was going to win. Germany had none, Japan had to grab what they could, while we were swimming in it.

An idea of Japanese 'honor' might be shown by what James Clavell, the author of Shogun, wrote. Clavell was a lieutenant captured at Singapore, and a Japanese officer, when Clavell said he was from an aristocratic family, became friendly and respectful to Clavell, sympathizing with his capture, and then offered his sword to Clavell so he could commit suicide and so preserve his families honor. When Clavell refused, the officer was shocked, angry, and struck Clavell.
To the Japanese, surrender was disgraceful and dishonorable. They saw western troops as being cowards by not dying at their posts. At Leyte, Americans saw Japanese sailors purposefully drown themselves rather than being captured.
It's finally a question of culture.
 
Old December 27th, 2020 #14
Stewart Meadows
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 37,509
Default

.
Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Steven. I agree with most of what you wrote, I'll just reply to a couple of things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steven clark View Post
Thank you for the comment, Stewart, and I too, admire the Japanese. They were hard, tough, innovative fighters and honorable, but they did some terrible atrocities that no one can wash away. Nanking, the Bataan death march, British POW labor on the Burma railroad,etc. The incident on Midway happened, and when we liberated the Philippines, Japs murdered American POWs by burning them alive. Also, they used pows and Korean prisoners for biological war experiments...
Yes, I'm familiar with (most of) this stuff, why, just today I saw parts of a documentary about Unit 731 (the infamous Japanese biological warfare unit) that was aired on RT (which I get on my TV). RT loves to air programs about how evil their Japanese enemies were in the war.

Quote:
the Germans are forever denounced for this, the Japanese...hardly hear about it.
Actually, we often hear about Japanese war crimes in WWII here in the West, and the jews are spreading anti-Japanese propaganda in Japan as well. I wrote about it in the following thread:

Jews use the "holocaust" to teach Japan about "the dangers of nationalism"

https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=552084

Quote:
So maybe they were on the right side, but remember, they were on Japan's side before anything else. They weren't trying to help Hitler, they were wanting to drive out the whites to set up the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity sphere...where they would 'liberate' asians, although it generally meant Japs taking over as boss.
Well, yes, that's pretty much true, I won't deny it.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 PM.
Page generated in 0.30985 seconds.